People v. Musser, 494 Mich. 337

Michigan Supreme Court case People v Musser; defendant convicted of two counts of second-degree criminal sexual conduct and one count of assault and battery.
Interrogation of defendant included detectives’ out-of-court statements commenting on credibility of the complainant and child victims generally.
Circuit Court admitted the detectives’ statements to provide context for defendant’s statements; defense moved for mistrial and for redaction, which were largely denied.
Trial court gave a limiting instruction after the recording was played; there was a belated instruction restricting the detectives’ statements to context.
Court of Appeals affirmed; Supreme Court granted leave to decide whether such vouching statements must be redacted from interrogation recordings before jury viewing.
Court held that out-of-court statements vouching for credibility may be admissible only if relevant under MRE 401 and properly restricted under MRE 105; in Musser, the trial court abused its discretion by admitting most such statements, undermining verdict reliability, leading to reversal and remand.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether detectives’ credibility vouching statements must be redacted	Musser argues statements lack probative value and are prejudicial.	State contends statements provide necessary context for defendant’s responses.	No bright-line rule; redaction required if statements are not probative or exceed proper scope.
Whether admission of unredacted statements undermined verdict reliability	Prosecutor’s use of statements as context skewed credibility assessment.	Contextual statements were necessary to understand defendant’s answers.	Yes; error undermined reliability; reversal and remand appropriate.

United States v. Bailey, 444 U.S. 394 (U.S. Supreme Court-1980) (jurors judge credibility; police comments may be improper)
People v. Buckey, 424 Mich. 1 (Mich. Supreme Court-1985) (vouching about credibility is generally inadmissible)
People v. Wilkins, 408 Mich. 69 (Mich. Supreme Court-1980) (relevance and proper scope required for statements offered for context)
People v. Crawford, 458 Mich. 376 (Mich. Supreme Court-1998) (trial court must ensure relevance and limit prejudicial impact)
People v. Jenkins, 450 Mich. 249 (Mich. Supreme Court-1995) (limiting instructions important to prevent substantive use of improper evidence)
People v. Peterson, 450 Mich. 349 (Mich. Supreme Court-1995) (credibility challenges in child-sex cases; caution on expert-like weight)